Promissory Note Case Laws

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 01 July 2010 This query is : Resolved
Dear Experts.

I am an advocate and I have been practicing since 21st Oct, 2009.
I have cross examined PW-1 and PW-2 reguarding pronote suit on behalf of Defendant. PW-1 in his Chief affidavit and in my cross examination he stated that he has given debt to Defendant for his family expenses and for the treatment of defendant health. Further he stated that he is doing finance business.

In my cross examination PW-2 stated that who is the father of PW-1 and also attestor of the said pronote like this his son has given the debt to defendant for discharging sundry debts. I questioned him that did your son (PW-1) has licence to do finance business. PW-2 stated that yes PW-1 has licence to do finance business. Even though PW-1 has no licence and not filed the copies of the licence. So PW-2 state falsely.

On the above two grounds is there any case laws to dismiss the suit.

Is the suit maintainable. It is my first case. Kindly suggest me some case laws to dismiss the suit.

thanks to every one who has read my query and for giving answer.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (Expert) 01 July 2010
case not maintanable.

SRIKANTH MYLAVARAPU (Expert) 01 July 2010
sir,
in the cross examination he stated that his son possess licence regarding lending money didu pose the same question to pw1?
plz tell me which state u belongs to why because in some states with out having licence money lending business is permissable.kindly give these details ill exactly guide u

pawan sharma (Expert) 01 July 2010
I agree with Mr. Srikant.

Uma parameswaran (Expert) 01 July 2010
Suit is not maintainable.

B K Raghavendra Rao (Expert) 02 July 2010
Suit is very much maintainable. In your cross-examination you have asked him whether his son has licence to do finance business. When the witness said 'yes'. The fact is established, but you did not cross examine further to demolish his statement. You have not asked for a copy of the licence. You should have filed an interlocutory application seeking direction of the court to file a copy of the licence. Therefore your cross-examination has not established that what PW-2 is saying is false. You should further probe and establish by your cross-exsmination that what PW-2 is saying is false. Also you should call for record what PW-2 says as his son has.

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (Expert) 04 July 2010
Certain basic facts can not be estblished by mere yes of the witness. Suppose tomorrow the witness says He is Prime minister of India will it be admissible.

Court presumes cetain facts and situations since every thing can not be provided in law.

Similarly in this case finance business is regulated by RBI and onus of proof is for the person claiming it; so even if he says yes it has no meaning since the buisenss is illegal. Tommorow somebody will say he has permission to do gambling business of for sale of illicit liquor or sale of drugs can it be belived by the court . No not at all.

Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now